Obamacare will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade

C

Cancel 2018. 3

<-- sched 2, MJ sched 1
President Obama's national health care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released today by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.

Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation, the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014, so it would appear cheaper under the CBO's standard ten-year budget window and, at least on paper, meet Obama's pledge that the legislation would cost "around $900 billion over 10 years." When the final CBO score came out before passage, critics noted that the true 10 year cost would be far higher than advertised once projections accounted for full implementation.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexami...bamacare-cost-176-trillion-over-10-yrs/425831

well...obama and the dems fooled most people...but now the wool is pulled back
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
The US spends $700 billion a year on its military, which is $7 trillion over a ten year period. I don't see you bellyaching about that!!
Click to expand...

we spend too much on our military. however, comparing the two is not quite correct. without a military, there would be no united states.
 
Yurt said:
we spend too much on our military. however, comparing the two is not quite correct. without a military, there would be no united states.
Click to expand...

Even a modest cutback of 10% would pay for universal healthcare, it really boils down to whether you want to pay to kill people in other countries or save people in your own country.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
Even a modest cutback of 10% would pay for universal healthcare, it really boils down to whether you want to pay to kill people in other countries or save people in your own country.
Click to expand...

10% would not pay for universal h/c. and it is not always about killing people in other countries, that is a logical fallacy.
 
Yurt said:
President Obama's national health care law will cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, according to a new projection released today by the Congressional Budget Office, rather than the $940 billion forecast when it was signed into law.

Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation, the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014, so it would appear cheaper under the CBO's standard ten-year budget window and, at least on paper, meet Obama's pledge that the legislation would cost "around $900 billion over 10 years." When the final CBO score came out before passage, critics noted that the true 10 year cost would be far higher than advertised once projections accounted for full implementation.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexami...bamacare-cost-176-trillion-over-10-yrs/425831

well...obama and the dems fooled most people...but now the wool is pulled back
Click to expand...


It takes a special breed to turn a report that the Affordable Care Act is projected to reduce deficits by $50 billion more than previously projected into a negative thing. Nice work.
 
Yurt said:
10% would not pay for universal h/c. and it is not always about killing people in other countries, that is a logical fallacy.
Click to expand...

I have never been convinced that the stated amount of declared military spending is the true cost. There is an enormous amount of subsidies to NASA, Boeing et al that should be taken into account.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
I have never been convinced that the stated amount of declared military spending is the true cost. There is an enormous amount of subsidies to NASA, Boeing et al that should be taken into account.
Click to expand...

they why throw out the idea of a 10% cut? NASA isn't subsidized...it is a government agency, not a private entity like boeing. the subsidies to boeing have little to do with the military, rather, to compete with other corps such as airbus who is subsidized a far greater amount. funny you don't have a problem with that. or do you?

tom, my thinking is this:

instead of creating another government agency, why not simply expand medicare? it would accomplish the same goals. with far less red tape and far less bureaucracy.
 
Yurt said:
?

it takes a special apologist to apologize for obama's gimmicks in getting his bill passed.

see what i did there...
Click to expand...


Of course, this ignore the CBO long term projections beyond the 10 year window which found that the deficit reductions increase over the longer term but whatever.
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
Of course, this ignore the CBO long term projections beyond the 10 year window which found that the deficit reductions increase over the longer term but whatever.
Click to expand...

your point?

why are you apologizing for obama's gimmickry? fact is, the CBO cannot have an actual number at this point to due obama's tricks. the number you're citing is still based on tricks. fact: the closer we get to implementation, the costlier it looks.

but i know you must apologize and defend.
 
Yurt said:
your point?

why are you apologizing for obama's gimmickry? fact is, the CBO cannot have an actual number at this point to due obama's tricks. the number you're citing is still based on tricks. fact: the closer we get to implementation, the costlier it looks.

but i know you must apologize and defend.
Click to expand...


What tricks? Go read the fucking CBO reports.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
It seems to me, from a European viewpoint, that providing a universal healthcare service is profoundly justified, from an humanitarian point of view.
Click to expand...

fair enough. but how am i denying anyone anything? given, i believe we can simply expand medicare to include all ages. of course, housekeeping will need to be done with waste, but i fail to see the need for a separate agency when we already have a government insurance established.

i don't believe there is a need for universal h/c. my wife is from canada and we clearly see the pros and cons. why do you think expanding m/c will not work?
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
The US spends $700 billion a year on its military, which is $7 trillion over a ten year period. I don't see you bellyaching about that!!
Click to expand...

having a military is, actually, a mandated function of the federal government......meanwhile I object to waste in the military as well.....thousand dollar screw drivers, etc......

back to topic, does it surprise you that federal health care is going to cost more than promised?.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top